Estonian Higher Education Accreditation Centre Evaluation of Research in Arts (6.5) in Estonia Institutes evaluated University of Tartu Chair of Art History Estonian Academy of Music Department of Musicology Higher Theatre School of Estonian Academy of Music Estonian Academy of Arts Faculty of Cultural Heritage and Conservation Faculty of Architecture Faculty of Art History Institute of History Department of Art History Evaluation dates March 9-16, 2003 Expert team: Prof. Lars Olof Larsson Prof. Tamas Mezös Kunsthistorisches Institut der Department for History of Architecture and Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Monuments Olshausenstraze 40 Budapest University of Technology and D-24098 Kiel Economics Germany Muegyetem rkp. 3 E-mail: [email protected] 1111 Budapest Hungary E-mail: [email protected] Prof. Eeva Maija Viljo Department of Art History Prof. Matti Huttunen University of Turku Sibelius Academy E-mail: [email protected] Docmus - Department of Doctoral Studies in Musical Performance and Research P.O.Box 86 FIN- 00251 Helsinki Finland Part I General Overview Introduction At the request of the Estonian Higher Education Accreditation Centre, Tallinn (EHEAC), an evaluation team (hereafter named the “Evaluators”) visited institutes in Estonia carrying out research activities in arts (6.5). The evaluating team consisted of Prof. Lars Olof Larsson (Kunsthistorisches Institut der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel), Prof. Eeva Maija Viljo (University of Turku), Prof. Tamás Mezös (Budapest University of Technology and Economics) and Prof. Matti Huttunen (Sibelius Academy, Helsinki). Prof. Huttunen arrived for the evaluation of the Departments of Estonian Academy of Music on Thursday (13. March). The institutions to be evaluated were: University of Tartu Chair of Art History Estonian Academy of Music Department of Musicology Higher Theatre School of Estonian Academy of Music Estonian Academy of Arts Faculty of Cultural Heritage and Conservation Faculty of Architecture Faculty of Art History Institute of History Department of Art History The evaluators were provided in advance with self-assessment report from the institutions, prepared by the members of their groups. After a brief orientation meeting at EHEAC, the evaluators visited the institutions to be evaluated in Tartu and Tallinn during four days. At these meetings staff members of the various departments presented their work. During these presentations as well as during the subsequent discussions additional information about the research activities was provided. This included additional documents such as copies of published papers. Approach to the evaluation The evaluators were asked to: 1) Judge the activities of research and development in the units evaluated and the research topics implemented by them to ensure the governmental funding for internationally recognised research and development. The Team was asked to concentrate on research units (university departments, laboratories) with specific comments to sub-units, groups if necessary. 2) Identify deficiencies in the activities of research and development units. 1 3) Give recommendations on the development concerning research and development and research areas to the state of Estonia. The Team received the following materials: A working schedule, principles and criteria for evaluation of the research units, evaluation guidelines for the ranking of research units, and self-evaluation reports created by the research units themselves. On a first evaluation point, the quality of the research activities was considered. This assessment is largely based on the records of scientific publications. Excellent The majority of the submitted works are at a high international level and virtually all others at a good international level. Excellent to At least one third of the submitted works are at a high international good level and many others at a good international level, these together comprise a clear majority. Good The majority of the submitted works are at least at a good international level and virtually all others at a fair international level Good to At least one third of the submitted works are at a good international satisfactory level and many others at a fair international level, these together comprise a clear majority Satisfactory The majority of the submitted works are at least at a fair international level Satisfactory to A minority of the submitted works are at a fair international level unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory None, or virtually none, of the submitted works are at a fair international level Regarding the grading of the research activities, the evaluation team was instructed by the EHEAC to reserve the term excellent for groups, which were found to be among the best 10% of the European groups in the corresponding field. Similarly, the term excellent to good should be used if the evaluated group was found to be among the best 25 % of corresponding European groups. The full scale comprised 7 levels, in addition to the highest ones the grades are good, good to satisfactory, satisfactory, satisfactory to unsatisfactory, and unsatisfactory. Secondly, the over-all capability of a research unit was evaluated based on a the combined assessment of the following criteria (each graded in three levels): . The originality/novelity of past and ongoing research activities . The strategy and perspective of the research . Multidiciplinarity and relevance for other research areas . The competence of the research groups and their capacity for development . National and international co-operation . Success in applying for grants As the result of this assessment one of the four grades excellent, good, satisfactory or unsatisfactory was given for the group. Thirdly, the implementation opportunities for the research results and their importance for the Estonian society were commented. Finally, on a fourth evaluation point the critical comments and recommendations were asked to give by the expert team. 2 Part II General Comments Introduction 2.1 General Comments The cultural and educational institutions of Estonia have gone through great changes in the 1990s after the country regained its independence. The higher institutions of learning, especially the schools training professionals for various fields of art, have been completely reorganised; in some areas of cultural expertise entirely new educational possibilities have been founded, and even older institutions have been given new possibilities. All this has been a tremendous cultural and economic effort on the part of a small nation. The institutions that we have evaluated have got their present organisation in 1995 or even later. Exposing these very new academic structures to evaluations is a great challenge for them as they have barely had time to consolidate their structures. Even so we have found the overall picture very convincing; not only are the institutions in working order, they have already produced impressive results in the way of research, and they can show up a team of academic experts that are capable of performing their tasks at an international academic level. 2.2 Introduction The research and educational institutions that we were asked to evaluate represent many and in part widely diverging fields of knowledge: art history, architecture, musicology, theatre, and conservation. It is not possible to place them under any one heading or to apply any one formula of evaluation. In the way of an introduction, some observations can be made that seem to apply in general. First of all, we are impressed by the way our Estonian colleagues have succeeded in integrating the results of the lifework of the emeriti, who have had to work decades under restrictive conditions, into the research and educational schemes of the present institutions. The efforts to give the “middle generation”, who have had to bear the brunt of the organising work and the creation of new projects and academic curricula, opportunities to update their research training can be noted with due respect. These groups of researchers and teachers have been joined by a younger generation of researchers, who seem just as indefatigable in their work to establish and develop Estonian academic institutions as their teachers and mentors. The academics are moreover actively publishing, besides research papers and books, presentations to the general public of various aspects of Estonian culture, as well as working for cultural and professional organisations. Estonian scholars are also very active in participating and in presenting papers in international scholarly or scientific conferences and seminars. Some have staid abroad in order to do research and gain academic qualification or and to gather knowledge and train themselves in order to set up academic specialities that have not previously existed in Estonia. 3 The evaluators have met professors, other academic teachers, researchers, and postgraduate students in the following institutions: the Chair of Art History at the University of Tartu, the Institute of Art History, the Faculty of Architecture, and the Faculty of Cultural Heritage and Conservation at the Estonian Academy of Art, the Department of Art History of the Institute of History, the Department of Musicology at the Estonian Academy of Music, and the Higher Theatre School. Professor Lars Olof Larsson has acted as leader of the evaluation team, except at the Deaprtment of Musicology, where Professor Matti Huttunen has led the interviews. Part III Evaluation of institutions